Seminole-Lake Accident

[Rich Owen]

Seminole-Lake Gliderport sadly announces we had a fatal glider accident today. The accident will be investigated by the FAA and NTSB, an inspector was on the scene today. We do not want to identify the pilot but he was flying a Standard Cirrus that he owned. He was NOT in the Senior Soaring Championship. The accident occurred after a premature release by the pilot from tow at about 500 feet over the end of the runway. We recovered an Oudie and Nano (this unit was still operational) at the site and we expect it will greatly aid in the investigation. We ask you not call the office or come to the gliderport to view the scene. Seminole-Lake has been in the business of promoting soaring for over 50 years and this is our first fatal accident. Our prayers go out to the pilot's family.

Sincerely,
Rich Owen

[Paul Agnew]

Condolences to all.

Paul A.

[Heinz Gehlhaar]

My heart goes out to the Family and to the Glider Port Folks.
Just make sure that the Flight Computers (Oudi & Nano) really get read out by the powers to be. The local Sheriff and apparently the FAA do not know about igc-files.
I was involved in a glider retrieval wihich turned into an attempted accident retrieval around Ephrata, WA. When I got to the site, the Sheriff already there, and totally prevented access; even visual, as the glider was behind a slight rise in the country. I offered the Sheriff help in readout of the flight computer, but even that was refused. I left my name just in case, but was never contacted again. And the subsequent accident report years later looked like they had never seen the flight trace. Interestingly, since I had access to one of the flight-recorders on board, I saw that the wreck was moved a couple of days later.

[sgs...@gmail.com]

Damn.

Let me add that NTSB/FAA are so clueless that I have seen multiple accident reports wherein a PTT was incorrectly described as "...the towplane released the glider...".

[waltco...@aol.com]

Sad to hear. One would think a Std Cirrus with 500 feet of altitude over the end of the runway would be easily landable. Lots of potential reasons, rope break, glider pilot released, tow pilot released, release malfunction, glider pilot incapacitation. NTSB and FAA investigations in situations like this are difficult to get exactly right.

Walt Connelly

[Richard Pfiffner]

On Wednesday, April 8, 2020 at 5:31:46 AM UTC-7, sgs...@gmail.com wrote:
> Damn.
>
> Let me add that NTSB/FAA are so clueless that I have seen multiple accident reports wherein a PTT was incorrectly described as "...the towplane released the glider...".

Condolences to all.

Last summer after the Nephi Fatal accident three pilots at the contest spent the next afternoon with the NTSB investigators. They retrieved the PowerFlarm with the help of one of the pilots. They asked me to download the flight. We went thru the entire flight with the investigators with SeeYou PC. They were interested in help and asked many questions about the flight and gliders. They also purchased SeeYou PC from me so they could look at the flight further. These inspectors were not clueless! They were very informed and professional. They were also interested in our opinions about what happened. R Owens call if you want the investigator's name and details.

Richard
www.craggyaero.com

[George Haeh]

The Oudie IGC file can be really useful. In the case of my incident, the Oudie was recording at one second intervals. There may be additional data if the Oudie was connected to a vario.

The Oudie people can be really helpful with analysis of accident IGC files. There's an internal buffer that can be read to extract the last moments of the flight if the IGC file was not completed.

[Bob Youngblood]

Sad to hear, I hope that this Std Cirrus was not assembled just before takeoff. Bob

[soa...@yahoo.com]

Heinz is mistaken. I personally assisted the NTSB in locating the FLARM and the GPS-NAV onboard that accident. The NTSB included the IGC file and the analysis of the flight in their final report and that information is located here:

https://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms/search/hitlist.cfm?docketID=61854&CFID=7532&CFTOKEN=bebf8c47d0f3bd89-87C8EBEA-5056-942C-926319AEB9E07248

[chip.b...@gmail.com]

I'll push back on the blanket condemnation of the FAA/NTSB. I should wait for someone with more specific knowledge to comment but my understanding is that they were quite conscientious and helpful in a recent accident investigation in our area.

My experience with the Feds has been mixed. Some are sharp, knowledgeable, open minded, and want to help. Others are self-important, insecure, blustering bureaucrats who jump to conclusions. It's a wide spectrum, sort of like with glider pilots, as we've seen on this forum from time to time.

Nothing is ever all good or bad. I suspect, as in most areas of our lives, how we behave and interact with the Feds has something to do with how they treat us. And that, in turn, probably has some impact on how they treat the next glider pilot they encounter.

Chip Bearden
ASW 24

[nuke...@mac.com]

Well said, Chip. And I'm very sorry to hear a fellow glider pilot is no longer with us. Condolences to their friends and family.

Mike Brooks
XL5

[Hal]

On Tuesday, April 7, 2020 at 9:35:22 PM UTC-4, Rich Owen wrote:

So sorry to hear this Rich! I have always been impressed with the safety culture at Seminole-Lake so this is a shock. My sympathies to all! Hal

[Heinz Gehlhaar]

I was informed that I was wrong regarding the IGC file on that accident. Apparently I did not see the final NTSB report and the attached IGC file. I will look at the files which are located here:
https://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms/search/hitlist.cfm?docketID=61854&CFID=7532&CFTOKEN=bebf8c47d0f3bd89-87C8EBEA-5056-942C-926319AEB9E07248.

Sorry about raising the issue.

[Papa3]

Sadly, I've got a box of shattered electronics sitting next to my office chair that came from the fatal accident of a good friend. After a lot of very dedicated and diligent work by the Pennsylvania State Police, FAA, and then the NTSB including the NTSB Electronics lab, they were able to recover the last few minutes of the flight from a badly fragged FLARM. Every one of the guys I dealt with was professional, caring, and interested in finding solutions.

That's not to say it was straightforward. They went down a few rabbit holes due to "procedures" that were frustrating at times. I had to invest some personal time to gain the confidence of the NTSB guy, but once that happened, they made me a formal party to the investigation and gave me full access to their information and findings. I think a lot of it depends on the usual relationship building skills. If you go in thinking they are a bunch of government hacks you'll probably find government hacks. If you approach them as professionals and show that you are willing and able to help, they are good guys.

Been my experience with most of the FAA guys I've dealt with over 30 years as well. Not perfect by any means, but decent enough guys if you come at them the right way.

Erik Mann
P3

[WaltWX]

It's sad... my Condolences to all..

Believe I sold my SN10B to the pilot in late November 2019. He/she was interested and enthusiastic about cross country and later, contest flying after coming from the hang gliding world. The Standard Cirrus was his "starter ship". We chatted about getting started with gliders.

Walt Rogers WX

[porto....@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, April 7, 2020 at 9:35:22 PM UTC-4, Rich Owen wrote:

Very Sad .. Tnank You ZO
OO

[2G]

On Tuesday, April 7, 2020 at 11:28:24 PM UTC-7, Heinz Gehlhaar wrote:

You should have found out who at the NTSB was assigned the investigation and contact him/her directly. This is the accident you are probably referring to:
http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2017/05/schleicher-asw-28-18e-n63kr-fatal.html
The report includes this:
"The glider was equipped with a PowerFLARM portable GPS device/transponder, which documented its flight track, speed, and altitude. Data retrieved from the device showed a flight track that began northwest of EPH about 1436. "
It has been my experience that the NTSB tries to get data out of any recording device on the accident aircraft, and any recordings to the accident itself.

Tom

[Rich Owen]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would like to say the FAA inspector and the two NTSB investigators are all top notch professionals. They have sought out our help in getting the flight logs downloaded. You all voiced good ideas on how to approach this investigation born out of how you handled other accidents. In specking with the NTSB investigators I have passed on some of these points.

Just to pass on some facts we know right now. None of this is an opinion. The Cirrus was stored in a hangar after it flew in the Senior Soaring Championship with a Romanian pilot flying the ship. It was not disassembled from that time until it flew yesterday. The mishap pilot was an experienced hang glider pilot, SEL private pilot and had received his private glider add-on rating at Seminole-Lake in November. The pilot purchased the glider in the same month with the goal of being a XC pilot and eventually entering contests. He was enthusiastic, asked tons of questions, and was very open to suggestions on how to be a better glider pilot. He was very much part of the Seminole-Lake family. I hope when the flight log is reviewed, and when the NTSB issues it's interim report, we will find out how this happened. In deference to his family, we will try not put out anything other than fact. Please honor this pilot by not floating theories not born out by the facts. Thank you.

His services will be a private affair due to Covid-19. I will pass on all your wishes to the family from this thread. As soon as the family approves, we will release the pilot's name. On a brighter note, Greg Shugg's phone, text, and email service blew up this morning wondering if he was the mishap pilot. That is why we purposely said the pilot did not fly in the Seniors. Greg was appreciative with the amount of care for his safety that he received.

Sincerely,
Rich Owen
ZO

[Ernst]

Hello Rich, Seminole Lake Team, and everyone.

This is so sad.

I commend your forthcoming communication.

Just be aware, with the information provided, it took me 5 minutes to identify the accident glider and pilot.

Take care,
Ernst

[waltco...@aol.com]

I wonder if there was any final determination as to the cause of the accident? It has been more than 2 years.

Walt Connelly
Former Tow Pilot
Now Happy Helicopter Pilot

[John Foster]

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/101152/pdf

[waltco...@aol.com]

Thank you, about what I expected. I'm not sure what I am doing wrong. but I have a heck of a time finding accident reports that should be completed. Amazing that it took 2 years for this one but I guess they have far bigger accidents to handle.

[youngbl...@gmail.com]

Walt, I think COVID had a lot to do with the investigation or lack of it. OBTP

[John Foster]

I really have struggled to find accident reports as well. There is not a clear place to find them, and searches of the NTSB database through their website end up being an exercise in frustration. These ones I found by searching the Aviation Safety Network for their accident reports. They will then link to the official NTSB report for each accident.

[waltco...@aol.com]

I kept a database of accident reports at one tine but sometimes they are deactivated if that's the word. Always good to read these things to try to understand what happened. Makes you wonder why spin recovery/spin avoidance isn't taught.

Walt Connelly

[George Haeh]

I've seen some clubs demanding a full turn in a spin before beginning recovery.

Following that technique when inadvertently entering a spin turning base or final, the ground will likely get in the way before recovery.

[waltco...@aol.com]

On Thursday, September 22, 2022 at 7:29:09 PM UTC-4, georg...@gmail.com wrote:
> I've seen some clubs demanding a full turn in a spin before beginning recovery.
>
> Following that technique when inadvertently entering a spin turning base or final, the ground will likely get in the way before recovery.

Yes my friend, there is an altitude below which recover is not possible but does that mean students should not be taught recovery technique? What if they have just enough room to recover? Spin avoidance low and in the pattern should be emphasized and as I have said, telling someone to do something and TEACHING them to do so are not the same.

Before I started flying tow I spent several thousand dollars to get back in the saddle, enjoyed every minute of it. Flew a Cub a couple of hours, a Stearman for 5 hours, 3 hours in a Pitts S2A doing spins and acrobatics and 4 hours in a Zlin with a former tow pilot doing upset recovery. I only really needed those skills once in the low kiting incident but I'm glad I had them.

You might have heard that a kiting incident below 800 feet will not give the tow pilot enough room to recover. I can tell you from experience, this is not true. I cannot imagine a more severe, sudden kiting as one I encountered at about 350 feet, could not release, fortunately the rope broke after I retarded the throttle and I had to fight the urge to pull back on the stick before I got the wing flying again. I recovered below tree top level just above a stall and with a couple of cows scattering below me. I was fortunate to learn to fly from a WW2 P51 pilot whose admonition was to keep flying no matter what. Put the inputs in you need to get the outcome for which you are looking.

[Bob W.]

Being congenitally afflicted with "engineer-brain," ever since I could
afford to play the flying game I absorbed incident/accident reports for
all the easily-grasped self-preservation reasons. I'm aware the FAA's
spin-training-related policies have evolved/flipped over time, and "get"
the various rationales pertinent to the issue. I also imagine myself to
have a decent grasp of human nature which - IMO - is a real player in
the big picture of departure/arrival, AOA-related, crunches (power &
glider).

If ever there's validity in using the word "never," it's, "Kids, *never*
venture into pattern-height stall-land!!!" Period. End of discussion.

My engineer brain concludes it prefers to have a *chance* of survival
(via a more-or-less horizontal hit) vs. the alternative of
almost-certain termination of life (via the dreaded essentially-vertical
hit).

I "always" flew patterns with that thought actively in mind, 100%
determined to "never go there." Worked for me.

Train as you deem personally best...

[Dan Marotta]

The FAA's position is that, if you never get into a spin, you won't have
to recover from one. That's a great philosophy except for the poor dude
who screws up the "prevention" part and has no recovery training to fall
back on. I think the policy is idiotic.

As a primary student in the USAF back in 1973, we flew gobs of spins in
the T-37, Much later while flying a T-33 and performing vertical rolls
to zero airspeed, the aircraft departed controlled flight. I
experienced end over end tumbles, inverted, and erect spins. Calmly
applying the spin recovery procedures learned in the Tweet recovered the
aircraft. Oh, and spins were prohibited in the T-33.

Dan
5J

[Wes Minear]

Dan,

You are right on target, for example in a typical club ship like an L33 at Min Sink when encountering a strong thermal the glider loves to stall and drop a wing.

At this point in the FAA's work load re-writing the standards for glider flying is not high on the workload of the FAA nor are they receiving pressure from lobbyists. If they aren't receiving pressure to change something then the best they can say is if you don't spin you won't spin, this is probably not an opinion coming from an experienced soaring pilot(at the FAA).

The onus of preparing people for a spin falls on the CFI. Taking a student soaring on a booming day and watching them stall and start to spin is a priceless learning moment, especially for experienced transition pilots.

Wes

[soa...@yahoo.com]

> > Walt Connelly
> > Former Tow Pilot
> > Now Happy Helicopter Pilot
> I really have struggled to find accident reports as well. There is not a clear place to find them, and searches of the NTSB database through their website end up being an exercise in frustration. These ones I found by searching the Aviation Safety Network for their accident reports. They will then link to the official NTSB report for each accident.

Try this link to the NTSB accident database website:
https://www.ntsb.gov/Pages/monthly.aspx

[2G]

Yeah PottyMouth Bobbie, you have to know:
1. What year it occurred, OR
2. Some idea where it occurred, OR
3. The name of the manufacturer, OR
4. The model of the aircraft, OR
5. Some part of the name of the pilot, OR
6. The severity of the injuries, OR
...Oh well, this is too much for a senile brain to handle.

[2G]

If I recall correctly, the FAA determined that more pilots were getting killed during spin training than those getting killed in actual spins. So, I did a search and found this article:
https://www.aopa.org/training-and-safety/flight-schools/flight-school-business/newsletter/2014/march/21/the-spin-training-debate-rages-on-65-years-later#:~:text=(In%201991%2C%20the%20FAA%20shifted,spin%20training%20was%20not%20required.
Basically, spin training does not help you during most real-world spins that occur in the traffic pattern.

Tom

[Stéphane Vander Veken]

Le lundi 26 septembre 2022 à 05:25:50 UTC+2, 2G a écrit :
> If I recall correctly, the FAA determined that more pilots were getting killed during spin training than those getting killed in actual spins. So, I did a search and found this article:
> https://www.aopa.org/training-and-safety/flight-schools/flight-school-business/newsletter/2014/march/21/the-spin-training-debate-rages-on-65-years-later#:~:text=(In%201991%2C%20the%20FAA%20shifted,spin%20training%20was%20not%20required.
> Basically, spin training does not help you during most real-world spins that occur in the traffic pattern.
>
> Tom

Right, but that concerns airplanes (with an engine - ususally, they only fly close to the stall speed when coming in for landing), and I seem to remember that spin training was maintained for sailplanes because we often fly close to the stalling speed in thermals for example. Having had an ASH-25 come down on me in a spin two years ago while I was thermalling (I escaped by pushing flaps and stick full forward and praying), I'm glad the pilot was able to end the spin without further problems.

I also lost a friend two months ago: he went into a spin during a winch launch. His Ka-6 did two and a half turns before crashing, so it seems he should have had enough time to stop the spin. I'm afraid his spin training was not enough for him to recognize the situation and react accordingly. Since the ASK-13 is no longer allowed to spin, we have no two-seater able to spin convincingly and only teach the "spin warning signs" and if possible, incipient spins. But our ASK-21 and Twin II won't spin at all if the front seat pilot is just a tad on the heavy side.

[Ido Millet]

There is an easy way to study spin-related (and other) glider accidents.
I used NTSB data (and my Visual CUT software) to create a web tool (interactive pivot tables & charts) for exactly this type of analysis.
It is available here: https://www.milletsoftware.com/Data/Glider_Events.html

A 2-minute video demo of using this tool to analyze spin-related glider accidents is available here:
https://www.milletsoftware.com/Download/Spin_Related_Glider_Accidents.mp4

Drilling-down from the table or chart displays allows you to hover over the narrative account for individual accidents and see the full text.

hth,
- ido

[Tony]

The newfangled CAROL search works pretty well with limited info, but it is not at all friendly to handheld gadgets: https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-main-public/landing-page
Otherwise paging through the monthly listings works if you have a reasonably accurate date - always interesting & informative to see what else you stumble across.

[2G]

That is true, we still get spin training during glider training because we fly in attitudes and speeds that violate the spin avoidance mantra. But a pattern altitude spin in a glider will be just as fatal as one for an airplane.

BTW, thermally at low altitudes (that below which you can recover from a spin) must be done by experts only.

Tom

[George Haeh]

If you catch an incipient wing drop before it becomes a full spin from base or final, your survival probability will improve significantly. The next problem is avoiding wires.

[Hank Nixon]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 9:11:27 PM UTC-4, georg...@gmail.com wrote:
> If you catch an incipient wing drop before it becomes a full spin from base or final, your survival probability will improve significantly. The next problem is avoiding wires.

Catching and properly responding can be 2 different things.
Correct automatic response needs to be opposite rudder and unload the wing.
These are counter intuitive until drilled in during training and recurrent training.
I never cease to be amazed at the number of pilots that get certificates with maybe a half a dozen flights showing stall and turn stall log book entries.
I strongly believe training can reduce spin accidents.
Grumpy instructor
UH

[Mark Mocho]

In his book "After All," Gren Seibels said about spin prevention training as opposed to actual spin training, "To my way of thinking, this is like telling a class of student sailors, 'We won't bother with teaching you to swim; we'll just teach you how not to fall overboard.' Wouldn't someone in this misguided group raise the skeptical point, Yeah, but suppose I do?"

[John Galloway]

On Wednesday, 28 September 2022 at 14:17:07 UTC+1, Mark Mocho wrote:
> In his book "After All," Gren Seibels said about spin prevention training as opposed to actual spin training, "To my way of thinking, this is like telling a class of student sailors, 'We won't bother with teaching you to swim; we'll just teach you how not to fall overboard.' Wouldn't someone in this misguided group raise the skeptical point, Yeah, but suppose I do?"

...but not that many people have accidents when they are being taught to swim so the risk/reward is strongly in favour of swim teaching. The calculation with spin training is much more nuanced depending of what type of spin training or refreshing is being considered. Also you can swim (or walk I guess) in any depth of water you could drown in but you can't spin-recover from every altitude you can fly in, so you can't remotely practice spin recovery from the low altitudes you are most likely to kill yourself from.

[Paul Agnew]

Perhaps the crux of the airplane spin training accidents cited by the FAA is that we often had instructors that only had the minimum required spin training to get the endorsement for their CFI ride and they lacked enough experience to properly teach them. I once took a CFI refresher course and the indomitable "Spin Doctor", Bill Kershner, was the guest speaker. He made all of the CFIs in the room feel like they knew nothing about spins when he started talking. By the end of the day, we all felt much better informed on all aspects of spins and best techniques for different trainers. That level of instruction could improve the success of spin training across the board.

Alas, we have people that haven't practiced a rope break since their checkrides years or decades before, so would they want to improve their spin awareness and recovery skills?

Would a specific CFI Spin-Teaching endorsement, based on a more comprehensive training requirement, alleviate the FAA's concerns and simultaneously provide better spin instruction?

PA

[Stéphane Vander Veken]

Le mercredi 28 septembre 2022 à 16:09:56 UTC+2, jpg...@gmail.com a écrit :
> ...but not that many people have accidents when they are being taught to swim so the risk/reward is strongly in favour of swim teaching. The calculation with spin training is much more nuanced depending of what type of spin training or refreshing is being considered. Also you can swim (or walk I guess) in any depth of water you could drown in but you can't spin-recover from every altitude you can fly in, so you can't remotely practice spin recovery from the low altitudes you are most likely to kill yourself from.

Well, I for one almost drowned in five feet of water while learning to swim. My mother pulled me out by the (then longish - 1969!) hair...

For spin training, you can combine scenario based training ("You are seriously low in the landing pattern, so you fly a bit slower to avoid descending too much, and you make a rather flat turn to base leg, fearing to touch the trees when lowering the wing. And when you see that you'll likely overshoot the centerline to turn on final, you just give a hard shove on the pedal...") at a safe altitude, and some demo flights on the simulator at pattern altitude. Not perfect, but nothing is perfect in this world...

[Martin Gregorie]

On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 10:56:24 -0700 (PDT), Paul Agnew wrote:

> Alas, we have people that haven't practised a rope break since their

> checkrides years or decades before, so would they want to improve their
> spin awareness and recovery skills?
>

Hmmm, the club I fly at requires a session in our simulator and check
flights at the start of the spring season every year. The latter include
both a high tow for stalling and spinning exercises as well as towing
competence checks, and at least one simulated cable break on a winch
launch. The simulator is a great help, since it allows you to do 5 or 6
winch launch failure exercises in an hour: if real life (TM) you'd be
lucky to manage more than one or two per hour on an average day at our
airfield.

I thought all clubs had a similar start-of-season refresher arrangement,
no matter where they are in the world. Personally, I wouldn't want it any
other way. To me that's no different to getting a check ride before being
allowed to fly at a club you've not previously visited - which is pretty
much SOP in the UK - and there are some fields where I'd expect a
checkride if I hadn't been there for 2-3 years, the more so since where I
fly is one of the flattest parts of the country: my club field, at 246ft
AMSL, is the highest airfield in the county.


--

Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

[R]

America is the land of independence, the right to decide your own fate even if it means taking a passenger with you.
Darwinism and ‘Can’t save everybody’ is embodied in our Constitution. Caveat Emptor is on our money. Everything designed around keeping Lawyers in British cars…Jaguars, Aston Martins, and Bentleys.
Martin…do you get a check ride before driving on the motorway every year? How will they know you won’t forget that right is left and never cross your horse with your Lance?
No Martin….the only thing required in America is….
Insurance.

H

[Eric Greenwell]

The FAA does require a flight check every two years, but it's rarely as thorough as
Martin's club. I do think there aren't enough simulators in use, and I'm not aware of any
useful ones for motorglider training.

--
Eric Greenwell - USA
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications

[Martin Gregorie]

On Sun, 2 Oct 2022 06:21:51 -0700, Eric Greenwell wrote:

> The FAA does require a flight check every two years, but it's rarely as
> thorough as Martin's club. I do think there aren't enough simulators in
> use, and I'm not aware of any useful ones for motorglider training.
>

My club built our own simulator from the front end of a crashed G.103 and,
IIRC Lockheed-Martin software that was derived from MS FS5.

Its has its own room in the clubhouse, with a set of five projectors above
the 'victim's seat and five large wall screens, each around 2 x 2.5m in
size, so the student gets around a 200 degree field of vision and isn't
generally aware of eith the topor bottom edge of the screens. . Its
instruments are images on an LCD screen behind a panel with cutouts for to
match the instrument faces. Cockpit is fixed to floor, original seating
and straps and a time-expired 'chute. All expected controls fitted and
working - only unreal thing is that control forces are zero, which takes a
little getting used to.

I think you need a similar rig if you're going to use it for flight
instruction, especially for pre-solo training on unflyable days or for
winch eventualities: it can simulate steady winds, and maybe gradient, but
I don't think it can simulate turbulence.

We have decent quality scenery centred on our airfield and including
enough area that any likely sim flight doesn't get near its limits. The
large screen area means that its unsafe to run the sim with anybody in the
room who isn't seated.

Yes, we do charge for simulator time.

[Dan Marotta]

Got that wrong Freight Dog. Insurance is NOT required to fly in the
Land of the Free except for driving on our roads and highways. That's
one of the things that makes us free!

Now, if you want to be legal, you have to receive a Flight Review every
two years in ANY aircraft in which you are qualified, Category doesn't
matter. You can take a Flight Review in a Ka-6 and then hop in your jet
and fly away perfectly legally.

I own and regularly fly three aircraft, each in a different Category.
As it turns out, the Stemme is the most complex but I choose (because I
live in the Land of the Free) to fly the airplane for a flight review
because it is IFR equipped.

It is the club or rental operation that requires a check ride, not the
law. If you don't want to take check rides then it's simple: Own your own.

Dan
5J

[R]

Glad we agree Dano that everything else I wrote is factually correct.
Carry on.

R

[Mark Mocho]

"You can take a Flight Review in a Ka-6 and then hop in your jet
and fly away perfectly legally."

Actually, not true. If you have a turbojet type rating, you must requalify each year as per FAR 61.58 to legally fly any other turbojet powered aircraft. Bob Carlton has been fighting that battle for years, along with the LOA (Letter of Authorization) for jet powered gliders. FAR 8130.2J includes the 61.58 recurrency check for jet gliders, but is primarily aimed at two seaters, not single seat sustainers. However, some overzealous FSDO inspectors have attempted to include the single seat sustainers. This interpretation is being challenged. It would all go away if the rule was made to read "turbojet powered AIRPLANE" as it was originally proposed. Somehow, when the rule was implemented, the wording changed mysteriously to "turbojet powered AIRCRAFT," which includes jet gliders.

It is pretty ludicrous, in my opinion. I have two Turbojet type ratings (in the Tst-14J BonusJet and the Schempp-Hirth Arcus J) built by Desert Aerospace (Bob Carlton). The FAA was flabbergasted to find out that, although my Pilot Certificate includes the two experimental turbojet authorizations, the certificate also reads "PP/G," meaning "Private Pilot / Glider." That's right, two jet ratings, but no powered airplane authorization.

[Dan Marotta]

Most everything else, Doggie. Except for that Caveat Emptor thing. I
liked the thing about the horse and lance!

Dan
5J

[Dan Marotta]

Oops! You're right Mark. I do have a turbojet rating but, since I
haven't flown one in over 40 years, I forgot. Sad thing about ageing!
Should have said King Air. It's only been 22 years since I've flown one
of those and I didn't need anything other than a check out (at
FlightSafety International) to fly it solo with a full load of passengers.

Did Bob have to get a type rating or LOA to fly the Sub Sonex?

Dan
5J

[Mark Mocho]

> Did Bob have to get a type rating or LOA to fly the Sub Sonex?
>

Yes. All SubSonex pilots need "comparable aircraft training" in something that replicates the operation requirements. Desert Aerospace offered engine familiarization training in the TsT-14J Bonusjet, since it uses the same PBS TJ-100 engine as the SubSonex. Comparable flight training was offered by Sonex Aircraft or the pilot could provide documentation of prior experience in similar types of aircraft. The check ride in the actual SubSonex was done by onboard video in the single seat SubSonex. The video was reviewed by the FAA authorized Designated Pilot Examiner to determine that required maneuvers and flight performance were properly performed. After acceptance, a LOA was issued (in most cases.) The turbojet authorization was added to the Pilot Certificate, if not already held by the pilot. However, turbojet authorizations are listed individually on the certificate, so the SubSonex was added to those already present. I have seen some Pilot Certificates with so many aircraft types included that they are multi-volume; some Pilot Certificates run to three or even four cards. And that print is pretty small!

I think this thread has drifted far enough from the Seminole Lake Accident topic to require a separate thread.

[Turkey Vulture]

[Turkey Vulture]

Most clubs in the USA don't have the resources to offer pilots this sort of check out Martin.
How many instructors and ships do you guys have?
To give every pilot in your club this kind of checkout is a major undertaking. Especially, when everyone shows up on the first good soaring day looking to get "checked out".

Our club focuses more on pilots that took the winter season off for checkout. If you are flying weekly, then you just need your BFR.

[Martin Gregorie]

On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 03:54:01 -0700 (PDT), Turkey Vulture wrote:

> Most clubs in the USA don't have the resources to offer pilots this sort
> of check out Martin.
> How many instructors and ships do you guys have?
>

Around 23 instructors (members, not professionals) 2 x K21, 1 x Puchacz, 1
x Perkoz with virtually all training using winch launches.

> To give every pilot in your club this kind of checkout is a major
> undertaking. Especially, when everyone shows up on the first good
> soaring day looking to get "checked out".
>

Its an annual check, done BEFORE the start of decent soaring weather so we
avoid the 'first good day' rush. Also, I suspect this annual checkout
approach to flight safety is more common outside the US of A than you
realise.

> Our club focuses more on pilots that took the winter season off for
> checkout.
>

The end of winter is the obvious time for checkouts.

> If you are flying weekly, then you just need your BFR.
>

Indeed, though I'll take a check ride if I haven't flown for 4 weeks.

[waremark]

The approach Martin describes is not universal in the UK. My club which is of a similar size and not far away does not require any annual check or refresher for pilots proposing to launch by aerotow (which is a large proportion of pilots who own their own gliders). An annual session is required for those wishing to launch by winch, focused on safe winch launching including recovery from launch failures. To maintain currency under a new UK licensing system requires two flights with an instructor within the last 24 months - the flight could be a 3 minute winch launch circuit.